Articles

Two decades ago, Al Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth" thrust climate change into the global spotlight. With dramatic imagery and dire warnings, it transformed a niche concern into a front-page crisis, influencing rich country leaders and elite jet-setters, and inspiring a generation of activists.

Twenty years affords distance to reflect not just on the film’s impact, but also its accuracy. Many of Gore’s most alarming predictions have failed to materialize, while the policy response it helped inspire has proven extraordinarily flawed.

For years, climate campaigners have claimed that our food supply is under grave threat from climate change caused by excessive fossil fuel use. Ironically, the war in the Middle East is highlighting the much bigger food challenge for the world: Not having enough access to fossil fuels to make fertilizer.

Fears of climate-driven food collapse are vastly overstated, while policies aimed at rapidly curbing fossil fuel use risk making food more expensive and less accessible, especially for the world’s poorest.

Congress, in a rare bipartisan effort, has reaffirmed America’s commitment as a generous donor abroad. The recently passed National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2026 allocates roughly $50 billion in base funding. That’s less than prior levels but far exceeds the deepest cuts proposed by the White House. The result underscores that lawmakers on both sides of the aisle seek to safeguard America’s influence in fostering a safer, more prosperous world through targeted international engagement.

I leader che un tempo si affidavano alla retorica delle emissioni zero ora parlano di sicurezza energetica e crescita economica. E la gente si è stufata di previsioni apocalittiche non basate su dati reali

På pladderfesten i Davos gavs klimataktivismen länge högsta prioritet. Så är det inte längre. Och hyperventilerande om domedagen ger inte längre några politiska framgångar.

A new pragmatism is infusing the climate debate in the West, driven by voters weary of soaring energy bills and annoyed by increasingly hysterical and patronizing climate rhetoric. From Washington to Westminster, Berlin to Canberra, the political class is confronting a simple truth: aggressive net-zero mandates are delivering present economic pain for unmeasurable and far-off climate gain.

What a difference a single year makes. The once-dominant push to radically reshape society in hopes of averting climate catastrophe has collapsed. Look at Davos, the talkfest long dominated by climate advocacy. That consensus has been all but abandoned by its once strongest proponents.

The IPCC’s rigor keeps a lid on alarmism. The U.S. is needed to make sure that doesn’t change.

V západních zemích se do debaty o klimatu vkrádá nový pragmatismus, poháněný voliči, kteří už mají dost rostoucích nákladů na energie i neustále hysteričtější a povýšenější rétoriky. Od Washingtonu přes Westminster, Berlín až po Canberru čelí političtí představitelé jednoduché pravdě: za současnými ekonomickými problémy stojí agresivní cíle uhlíkové neutrality, a to jen kvůli nezměřitelným a naprosto vzdáleným klimatickým přínosům.

An outspoken global actor in the grand theater of climate policy, New York has long insisted the transition to green energy would be cheap and straightforward.